Pursuant to Indiana Evidence Rule 103, a defendant preserves a continuing objection to the admission of evidence for appellate review simply by making a timely objection to that evidence during trial, identifying the specific ground for the objection, and receiving the trial court’s definitive ruling on the objection on the record at trial.
Appeals
State v. Watson, No. 25A-CR-1789, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Mar. 18, 2026).
Under Indiana law, prior accusations are demonstrably false where the victim has admitted the falsity of the charges or they have been disproved.
Jayla Anderson v. Advantix Development Corporation, No. 25A-EV-1738, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Mar. 6, 2026).
The trial court erred as a matter of law when it denied Anderson’s petition to seal the record of her eviction case. She satisfied the statutory condition for the record to be sealed, and the trial court was required by statute to seal the record.
Gluys v. State, No. 25A-CR-1488, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Feb. 25, 2026).
“Harassment” for purposes of the crime of invasion of privacy is based on the definition found in Indiana Code section 34-6-2-51.5.
Wilson v. State, No. 25A-CR-1542, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Feb. 16, 2026).
There must be additional indicia of erratic driving or unusual driving behavior before a reasonable suspicion arises that a motorist who is merely making jerky body movements is driving under the influence of drugs or alcohol.